137 replies to this topic

[positiveContact]

That first quote was uncalled for.

it's the truth. your initial statement doesn't jive with your later statements. the initial statement did cause a big ruckus though. so yes, my statement was factual. well done on bringing some traffic through the brewing forum though

[Clintama]

it's the truth. your initial statement doesn't jive with your later statements. the initial statement did cause a big ruckus though. so yes, my statement was factual. well done on bringing some traffic through the brewing forum though

You blatantly misquoted me or do you not understand what quotation marks mean?

[positiveContact]

You blatantly misquoted me or do you not understand what quotation marks mean?

I don't see where I did that. care to link to the exact post?do you mean this post where I actually include your exact post? is that where I blatantly misquoted?

Edited by StudsTerkel, 05 March 2013 - 09:04 AM.

[djinkc]

I don't see where I did that. care to link to the exact post?

He's trolling for a fight, again. And pick the wrong forum to do it in.

[Big Nake]

It's amazing to me that you guys are arguing over this. Do what you normally do to make the beer that you like and leave it alone. This hobby is filled with unicorns and the same conversations keep going around in a circle. HSA, SS vs. aluminum, tannin extraction and the list goes on. Sometimes I make a 5% beer with a just-smacked, fresh Wyeast pack and no starter. It makes beer that I consider to be excellent. Would I suggest that for a lager or larger-OG beer? Probably not. If you disagree with someone on the board and you have experience with the topic, just follow your gut.

Edited by KenLenard, 05 March 2013 - 09:06 AM.

[positiveContact]

It's amazing to me that you guys are arguing over this. Do what you normally do to make the beer that you like and leave it alone. This hobby is filled with unicorns and the same conversations keep going around in a circle. HSA, SS vs. aluminum, tannin extraction and the list goes on. Sometimes I make a 5% with a just-smacked, fresh Wyeast pack and no starter. It makes beer that I consider to be excellent. Would I suggest that for a lager or larger-OG beer? Probably not.

you are in the realm of reasonble there.

[Mindblock]

Note to self:Don't Feed the Trolls!!!Thank-you, and carry on..... <G>

[Clintama]

I don't see where I did that. care to link to the exact post?do you mean this post where I actually include your exact post? is that where I blatantly misquoted?

"Pointing out that your idea ("pitching rates don't matter") is unsupported by any evidence gathered by you or by others is not personal bashing. Looking at the evidence which supports a given idea is part of the discussion, and it's a crucial part IMHO."My apologies It was someone else that misquoted me, You just piled on. And no, I'm not trying to start a fight. I'm just offering another opinion.I'm done here,. Pitch however you like.

[zymot]

In BCS for most recipes JZ suggests pitching multiple yeast packs or making an "appropriate" starter.

I noticed that on White Labs FAQ site they say if you want, you can make a 1 pint starter and that will get you to more optimum pitching rates. I notice they do not mention anything about a stir plate.A 1 pint starter is certainly quite different from the monster 4+ liter starters I used to read about, back when Mr malty was the final word on yeast.Maybe someday I will do the experiment. 10 split into two buckets, 1st gets a single vial direct, second buckets gets an identical vial put through a 2 liter starter on a stir plate.

[ChefLamont]

He's trolling for a fight, again. And pick the wrong forum to do it in.

This. Been a while since a thread in the beer forum went on lock down.

[davelew]

You blatantly misquoted me or do you not understand what quotation marks mean?

That was me. I apologize, I didn't mean to make you upset by paraphrasing you. Saying that "Pitching rates are not all that important" is clearly a world away from saying "pitching rates don't matter".

[Clintama]

That was me. I apologize, I didn't mean to make you upset by paraphrasing you. Saying that "Pitching rates are not all that important" is clearly a world away from saying "pitching rates don't matter".

Thank you.

[Big Nake]

I noticed that on White Labs FAQ site they say if you want, you can make a 1 pint starter and that will get you to more optimum pitching rates. I notice they do not mention anything about a stir plate.A 1 pint starter is certainly quite different from the monster 4+ liter starters I used to read about, back when Mr malty was the final word on yeast.Maybe someday I will do the experiment. 10 split into two buckets, 1st gets a single vial direct, second buckets gets an identical vial put through a 2 liter starter on a stir plate.

For the record, on a lager or other beer where I think a starter is necessary (maybe the yeast is older, etc), the starter I make is just a 650ml starter with ½ cup of DME, oxygenated and then placed on a stirplate until it appears active (some krauesen on top, it foams when you shake it, etc) and then I pitch. I'm sure most people (lager brewers especially) would say that is underpitching. When it comes time to pitch, I oxygenate again (pure O2) and pour the entire contents of the starter flask into the primary. This might be a 5% lager and my results are usually very much acceptable to me. I don't think I've ever "bumped up" a starter in my life. Once I have that slurry for the next beer, I check Mr. Malty and I slide the controls to be a bit conservative on how much active yeast I really have and pitch that amount or maybe a smidge more... which is ordinarily only about 200ml of thick slurry which is not much at all. I can typically harvest over 1000ml of slurry from a primary (clearly some of this is beer, hop sludge, break material, etc.) but these are my pitching processes and gonzo starters or pitching giant volumes of slurry are not a part of it. Just my 2¢.

[TehFury]

It's amazing to me that you guys are arguing over this. Do what you normally do to make the beer that you like and leave it alone. This hobby is filled with unicorns and the same conversations keep going around in a circle. HSA, SS vs. aluminum, tannin extraction and the list goes on. Sometimes I make a 5% beer with a just-smacked, fresh Wyeast pack and no starter. It makes beer that I consider to be excellent. Would I suggest that for a lager or larger-OG beer? Probably not. If you disagree with someone on the board and you have experience with the topic, just follow your gut.

Exactly. Chill out guys

[Enid Puceflange]

It's easy to brew better beer than "commercial" beer because you are brewing to your tastes for the most part. There are some fantastic commercial beers, but very few are perfect for everybody.Quality - Clarity, shelf life, carbonation, infection, are easier to control on a commercial level.That being said, commercial beer is brewed to make money, not to satisfy your personal tastes so brewing a delicious beer that you love is going to be easier.

Pretty much this. I've been brewing for rather a long time now (I started before I went to college) and I'd say that there are three basic stages of homebrewing:First there's the shock that you can make something that doesn't taste horrible, and that you can still see after drinking it.After a few batches, you get to the point where you understand sanitation and the processes enough that you're consistent, and with a decent recipe you can make stuff that's as good as commercial beers. Here I'm thinking that you can make someone else's recipe and have it come out the same two brews in a row, and like it. This is the point where your pals come over, drink your beer and are surprised :)The third stage takes a little while longer - and that's the point where it's better than commercial beer. I don't care WHAT commercial brewery is making it, they are trying to sell beer, and for that they have to appeal to a large audience. Me, I only have to appeal to me. If you like my beer, great. If you don't, well the SN Torpedo is in the fridge over there. I brew EXACTLY what I want to drink. No compromises. If I think that the beer flavor should be APA with cherry and Belgian hops, that's what I'll brew.There's a lot of crossover between stages 2 and 3 (mostly the ability to formulate your own recipes) and I will say that it REALLY helps doing beer competitions to understand how to taste, and then control the nuances.just my $0.02

[denny]

I think, though, that we need to distinguish between making beer we like to drink and whether or not a beer is well made and without flaws. They're not always the same thing.

[Big Nake]

Pretty much this. I've been brewing for rather a long time now (I started before I went to college) and I'd say that there are three basic stages of homebrewing:First there's the shock that you can make something that doesn't taste horrible, and that you can still see after drinking it.After a few batches, you get to the point where you understand sanitation and the processes enough that you're consistent, and with a decent recipe you can make stuff that's as good as commercial beers. Here I'm thinking that you can make someone else's recipe and have it come out the same two brews in a row, and like it. This is the point where your pals come over, drink your beer and are surprised :)The third stage takes a little while longer - and that's the point where it's better than commercial beer. I don't care WHAT commercial brewery is making it, they are trying to sell beer, and for that they have to appeal to a large audience. Me, I only have to appeal to me. If you like my beer, great. If you don't, well the SN Torpedo is in the fridge over there. I brew EXACTLY what I want to drink. No compromises. If I think that the beer flavor should be APA with cherry and Belgian hops, that's what I'll brew.There's a lot of crossover between stages 2 and 3 (mostly the ability to formulate your own recipes) and I will say that it REALLY helps doing beer competitions to understand how to taste, and then control the nuances.just my $0.02

I have been thinking that same "slope" of experience for awhile... you put it well. The finer adjustments are made in that last phase where you might be looking at very specific things in an attempt to get your "very good" beer to a "great" beer or a "great" beer to an "epic" beer or whatever. That's when your friends from the first two phases come back and tell you, "Man some of those early beers were ROUGH!"

[Genesee Ted]

I think, though, that we need to distinguish between making beer we like to drink and whether or not a beer is well made and without flaws. They're not always the same thing.

Indeed.